The discontent was soon allayed by a successful dash upon Brentford.
The town was taken, though not without hard fighting, and there was
captured also a good supply of guns and ammunition. The question as to
whether this advance, pending negotiation, was or was not a breach of
faith on the King's part has been much debated. No cessation of arms
had been agreed on, but the Parliament, thinking it a mere oversight,
had sent again in order to arrange it. At the same time Essex was
warned to hold all his forces ready for battle, but to abstain from
acts of hostility. Essex having advanced towards him, the King would
have been completely surrounded, had he not seized upon Brentford.
Therefore, from the military point of view, the advance was altogether
justifiable; from the political, it was unwise, for it lost Charles the
hearts of the Londoners. "Charles's error," says Professor Gardiner,
"lay in forgetting that he was more than a victorious General."[37]
The King's triumph was short-lived. The citizens and the Parliamentary
troops rallied to the defence of the capital. An army, twice as large
as that of Charles, barred his way on Turnham Green. Essex advancing
on Brentford, forced Rupert to retire. This he did in excellent order,
entrusting the conduct of the retreat to Sir Jacob Astley. The Prince
himself stood his horse in the river beside the bridge that he might
watch his men pass over. And there he remained for hours, exposed to a
heavy fire, and all the while "cheering and encouraging the retiring
ranks to keep order, and to fire steadily on the advancing foe."[38]
His troops passed that night drawn up on Hounslow Heath; {100} thence
Rupert conducted them to Abingdon, himself returning, November 22nd, to
the King at Reading.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account